Hacker News Reader

Comment by ciniglio | Hacker News Reader

Looks like their plan is to reuse the ocaml compiler backends that output javascript; but it doesn't sound like they're doing anything explicit to promote Reason -> Javascript compilation.

View on HN

Well, if you ignore the red button that runs you through comparisons of different Javascript syntax to the equivalent Reason syntax, then sure, they aren't doing anything explicit...

That's a comparison of syntax, which has nothing to do with compiling to Javascript.

Whether they have an intermediate step that is OCaml or not is irrelevant. Most compilers have one of more intermediate representations between source and executable. I think providing a syntax comparison to Javascript right next to a syntax comparison to OCaml is a clear indication that they are marketing to Javascript programmers, and the only reason for that is if they intend thelanguage as a replacement or supplement to Javascript.

That may or may not seem relevant to you based on ciniglio comment, but I think it's on point if you follow the thread from it's source down.

In 2016, "marketing to JavaScript programmers" is pretty much the same thing as "marketing to programmers". Providing context that the vast majority of programmers will understand is helpful regardless of the compilation strategy. That being said, of course people want a language that can compile to JavaScript, and it's worth mentioning the expanding set of options for doing so. But the syntax comparison really would be worthwhile even if it weren't the case, if only to provide context to what is likely the largest developer community that exists today.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com